How cited: De Aruajo v. Gonzales · Go Syfert

De Aruajo v. Gonzales (2006)

green · 29 citation events across 8 courts. Showing the 27 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 2007 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
200720162026
Rule Authority · 1st Cir.
App. P. 10(c), 11(a); De Araujo v. Gonzales, 457 F.3d 146, 155 (1st Cir. 2006) (citing 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(1)); United States v. One Motor Yacht Named Mercury, 527 F.2d 1112, 1113 (1st Cir. 1975) ("The burden is on the appellant to provide this court with an appendix sufficient to support its points on appeal.”).
citing 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(1)
Rule Authority · 1st Cir. · signal: cf.
It is black letter law that “we deem waived claims not made or claims adverted to in a cursory fashion, unaccompanied by developed argument.” Rodríguez v. Municipality of San Juan, 659 F.3d 168, 175 (1st Cir.2011); cf. De Araujo v. Gonzales, 457 F.3d 146, 152-53 (1st Cir.2006) (petitioner’s failure to challenge Board of Immigration Appeal’s summary dismissal of his case for failure to file a brief waived his argument on the merits).
Rule Authority · 3rd Cir.
De Araujo v. Gonzales, 457 F.3d 146, 153 (1st Cir. 2006); Voci v. Gonzales, 409 F.3d 607 , 610 n.1 (3d Cir. 2005). 4 “pattern or practice,” the persecution of a group must be “systemic, pervasive, or organized.” Lie v. Ashcroft, 396 F.3d 530, 537 (3d Cir. 2005).
Rule Authority · 3rd Cir.
De Araujo v. Gonzales, 457 F.3d 146, 153 (1st Cir.2006); Voci v. Gonzales, 409 F.3d 607 , 610 n. 1 (3d Cir.2005). .
Rule Authority · 3rd Cir.
De Araujo v. Gonzales, 457 F.3d 146, 153 (1st Cir.2006); Voci v. Gonzales, 409 F.3d 607 , 609 n. 1 (3d Cir.2005).
Rule Authority · 3rd Cir.
De Araujo v. Gonzales, 457 F.3d 146, 153 (1st Cir. 2006); Voci v. Gonzales, 409 F.3d 607 , 609 n.1 (3d Cir. 2005).
Rule Authority · 3rd Cir.
De Araujo v. Gonzales, 457 F.3d 146, 153 (1st Cir.2006); Voci v. Gonzales, 409 F.3d 607 , 610 n. 1 (3d Cir.2005). 3 .
Rule Authority · 3rd Cir.
De Araujo v. Gonzales, 457 F.3d 146, 153 (1st Cir.2006); Voci v. Gonzales, 409 F.3d 607 , 610 n. 1 (3d Cir.2005).
Rule Authority · 1st Cir.
See 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (a)(2)(C), (a)(2)(D); De Araujo v. Gonzales, 457 F.3d 146, 153 (1st Cir.2006); see also Conteh v. Gonzales, 461 F.3d 45, 63-64 (1st Cir.2006)(discussing restrictions on judicial review in cases involving waiver of inadmissibility under § 1182(h)).
green Reda v. Mukasey (2008)
Rule Authority · 6th Cir.
This point is critical, because, in the immigration context, arguments regarding ineffective assistance of counsel must point to a violation of the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause, see Denko v. INS, 351 F.3d 717, 723 (6th Cir.2003), and because “an alien does not have a constitutionally protected interest in receiving discretionary relief from removal or deportation,” Ramirez v. Gonzales, 247 Fed.Appx. 782, 786 (6th Cir.2007) (quoting De Araujo v. Gonzales, 457 F.3d 146
Rule Authority · 8th Cir.
Garcia-Mateo v. Keisler, 503 F.3d 698, 700 (8th Cir. 2007) (citing Nativi-Gomez v. Ashcroft, 344 F.3d 805, 808 (8th Cir. 2003) (no constitutionally protected interest in discretionary relief from removal)); De Araujo v. Gonzales, 457 F.3d 146, 153-55 (1st Cir. 2006) (no colorable due process claim when alien fails to state a protected liberty or property interest).
no colorable due process claim when alien fails to state a protected liberty or property interest
Rule Authority · 8th Cir.
Garcia-Mateo v. Keisler, 503 F.3d 698, 700 (8th Cir.2007) (citing Nativi-Gomez v. Ashcroft, 344 F.3d 805 , 808 (8th Cir.2003) (no constitutionally protected interest in discretionary relief from removal)); De Araujo v. Gonzales, 457 F.3d 146, 153-55 (1st Cir.2006) (no colorable due process claim when alien fails to state a protected liberty or property interest).
green Saliba v. Mukasey (2008)
Rule Authority · 1st Cir.
See Hana, 503 F.3d at 43-44 ; De Araujo v. Gonzáles, 457 F.3d 146, 153-55 (1st Cir.2006); Mehilli, 433 F.3d at 93-94. *334 Second, Saliba’s premise is factually incorrect.
green Ramirez v. Gonzales (2007)
Rule Authority · 6th Cir.
Because “an alien does not have a constitutionally protected interest in receiving discretionary relief from removal or deportation,” De Araujo v. Gonzales, 457 F.3d 146, 154 (1st Cir.2006), he can hardly claim a constitutionally protected interest in what the IJ or BIA considers, or does not consider, in determining whether to grant discretionary relief.
Rule Authority · 1st Cir.
But “issues adverted to in a perfunctory manner, unaccompanied by some effort at developed argumentation, are deemed waived.” De Araujo v. Gonzales, 457 F.3d 146, 153 (1st Cir.2006) (quoting United States v. Zannino, 895 F.2d 1, 17 (1st Cir.1990)).
green Pan v. Gonzales (2007)
Rule Authority · 1st Cir.
We refuse to go down so wayward a path. 5 Accord Arias v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 482 F.3d 1281, 1284 (11th Cir.2007); De Araujo v. Gonzales, 457 F.3d 146, 154 (1st Cir.2006); Mehilli, 433 F.3d at 94 .
green Hafeez v. Gonzales (2007)
Rule Authority · 10th Cir.
See, e.g., Bazua-Cota v. Gonzales, 466 F.3d 747, 748-49 (9th Cir.2006); De Araujo v. Gonzales, 457 F.3d 146, 154 (1st Cir.2006); Bugayong v. INS, 442 F.3d 67, 72 (2d Cir.2006).
green Mattes v. Dudek (2025)
Rule Authority · D. Mass.
The ALJ made similar findings in 14 De Araujo v. Gonzales, 457 F.3d 146, 153 (1st Cir. 2006)) (holding that “issues adverted to in a perfunctory manner, unaccompanied by some effort at developed argumentation, are deemed waived”).
Rule Authority · D. Me.
De Araujo v. Gonzales, 457 F.3d 146, 153 (1st Cir.2006).
green Vining v. Astrue (2010)
Rule Authority · D. Me.
Co., 840 F.2d 985, 990 (1st Cir.1988) (“[Rule 72] does not permit a litigant to present new initiatives to the district judge.”); see also Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3); De Araujo v. Gonzales, 457 F.3d 146, 153 (1st Cir.2006) (“[I]ssues adverted to in a perfunctory manner, unaccompanied by some effort at developed argumentation, are deemed waived.” (citation omitted)). 2 With respect to whether the record as a whole supports the conclusion that the Assembler-optical job exists in se…
green Makieh v. Holder (2009)
Cited · 1st Cir. · signal: see · 2 citations in this opinion
See De Araujo, 457 F.3d at 154-55 .
green Williams v. Garland (2024)
Cited · 1st Cir. · signal: see
Cyr, 533 U.S. 289, 295 (2001) (citing In re Silva, 16 I. & N. Dec. 26, 30 (B.I.A. 1976)). - 6 - For discretionary decisions about removal, we typically have jurisdiction over only a limited set of issues: questions of law and constitutional claims. 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (a)(2)(B)-(D); see De Araujo v. Gonzáles, 457 F.3d 146 , 153–54 (1st Cir. 2006).
green Lopez v. Holder (2014)
Cited · 1st Cir. · signal: accord
Urizar-Carrascoza v. Holder, 727 F.3d 27, 32 (1st Cir.2013); accord De Araujo v. Gonzales, 457 F.3d 146, 155 (1st Cir.2006); Elysee v. Gonzales, 437 F.3d 221, 223-24 (1st Cir.2006).
green Hakim v. Holder (2010)
Cited · 1st Cir. · signal: see
First, “the alien [must have] exhausted all administrative remedies available to the alien as of right.” 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (d)(1); see De Araujo v. Gonzales, 457 F.3d 146, 152 (1st Cir.2006) (“This exhaustion requirement generally means that the BIA must first review an IJ’s determination of [removability] before a petitioner may present his appeal to us.”) (citation omitted).
Cited · 6th Cir. · signal: see
See De Araujo v. Gonzales, 457 F.3d 146, 154 (1st Cir.2006).
green Fryar v. Curtis (2007)
Cited · 1st Cir. · signal: see
See De Araujo v. Gonzales, 457 F.3d 146, 153 (1st Cir.2006) (“[Cjonclusory statements, without further development, do not rise to the level of a cognizable appellate argument.”).
green Okpoko v. Heinauer (2011)
Cited · D.R.I. · signal: see
See De Araujo v. Gonzáles, 457 F.3d 146, 154 (1st Cir.2006) (“A constitutional claim would at least have to be colorable before a court will exercise jurisdiction to review such a claim or question.